Landmark Judgement: Supreme Court's Historic Ruling on SC/ST Quotas
On August 1, the Supreme Court delivered a landmark judgment that could reshape the affirmative action landscape in India. A seven-judge panel, headed by Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud, issued a ruling that redefines how the reservation system for Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST) will function. This judgment marks the first significant change in the quota system since the Constitution introduced reservations in 1950.
Reframing the Quota System: A Historic Overhaul:-
For over seventy years, the reservation system for SCs and STs remained largely unchanged, with these communities being treated as homogeneous groups for the purpose of quotas in education and public employment. The new ruling, however, allows for a more nuanced approach by permitting states to create sub-classifications within the SC and ST categories. This means that the most backward communities within these categories can receive additional protections and benefits through fixed sub-quotas.
The Details of the Judgement:-
In a 6:1 ruling, the bench permitted states to create sub-classifications within the SC and ST categories to provide broader protections through fixed sub-quotas to the most backward communities. This decision overturns the Supreme Court's 2004 ruling in E V Chinnaiah v State of Andhra Pradesh, which held that SCs and STs constitute a homogenous group that cannot be further divided.
Multiple Opinions and a Dissent:-
The landmark judgment included six separate opinions, with five justices in favor of sub-classification and one dissenting opinion by Justice Bela Trivedi. Chief Justice Chandrachud's opinion emphasized that inclusion in the Presidential list does not automatically create a uniform and homogeneous class that cannot be subdivided.
Article 341 and Historical Context:-
Article 341 of the Constitution empowers the President to list castes, races, or tribes as SCs who have historically suffered from untouchability. These groups collectively receive 15% reservation in education and public employment. However, over the years, disparities within the SC list have become evident, with some groups being significantly underrepresented.
Previous Attempts and Judicial Scrutiny:-
States have made several attempts to address these disparities by extending more protection to the most backward SC groups. For instance, in 1975, Punjab issued a notification giving first preference in SC reservations to the Balmiki and Mazhabi Sikh communities. This move,
however, faced legal challenges and judicial scrutiny, leading to its eventual annulment by the Supreme Court in 2004.
The Key Issues Before the Bench:-
The Supreme Court's seven-judge bench addressed several critical issues, including whether all castes in the SC list should be treated similarly, the extent of states' powers to sub-classify the Presidential list under Articles 15(4) and 16(4), the criteria for sub-classification, and the application of the 'creamy layer' principle to SCs and STs.
1. Equal Treatment: The court examined whether all castes listed as SCs should be treated identically, irrespective of their relative backwardness.
2. Sub-classification Power: The bench considered whether states can sub-classify the Presidential list to provide more targeted benefits to the most backward groups.
3. Yardstick for Sub-classification : The court emphasized the need for empirical evidence and a reasonable rationale for any sub-classification.
4. Creamy Layer Principle: Justice Gavai's opinion suggested applying the 'creamy layer' principle to SCs and STs, ensuring that reservation benefits reach those most in need.
Impact on Various States and Communities :-
The ruling is expected to have significant implications across various states, where SC and ST communities have diverse compositions and varying degrees of socio-economic advancement. The court's decision provides a framework for states to ensure that the benefits of reservations are more equitably distributed among the most disadvantaged groups within the SC and ST categories.
Conclusion:-
The Supreme Court's historic ruling marks a turning point in India's affirmative action policies. By allowing states to create sub-classifications within SC and ST categories, the court has paved the way for a more targeted and effective distribution of reservation benefits. This judgment not only addresses the internal disparities within these groups but also reaffirms the state's role in advancing social justice for the most marginalized communities.